I worked with PETA this week

[AllIveEverTouched]

Hey, did you get anything out of Bronco giving you the definition of "exploit"? Because I noticed you had no idea what the word even meant.

 

From Merriam Webster Online:

 

1 : to make productive use of : UTILIZE

 

Notice that the first example reflects upon using oneself.

 

 

Anyway to answer your question, perhaps you hadn't noticed by here on planet earth, women are routinely treated worse then men. They are treated like objects. They are "objectified". Their worth is often determined by the shape and size of their ass. As men are treated better than women, it of course makes sense to fix the biggest problems first.

 

 

What does using a naked body for veganism have to do with sexism? Please make a concise link between nakedness (for veganism) and sexism.

 

Earlier you showed that you had no idea what all the fuss was about when you equated farty conservatives with being anti-sexist/anti-exploitation. Antisexist people are almost always the very liberal types that are "on the fence". You've seem to have misunderstood and equated people asserting "exploitation" with prudish religious conservative types. You couldn't be any farther off the mark.

 

I was just throwing a group out there. There are plenty of liberal women who think it's okay to display themselves nakedly for whatever reason they choose and equally as many conservatives who will disapprove. Obviously it isn't wise to stereotype to begin with.

 

It also seems PETA is pretty bad at giving meaningfull answers to this kind of critisism. I would like to think they have some analysis of what they are doing, but they seem unwilling to share what exactly they think regarding the sexism.

 

They may have nothing to say. I won't speak for them.

 

Yes, but we are fellow vegans!!!! Hmmm, perhaps we should treat PETA the way they have been treating these other companies....

 

Do what you please... http://www.petakillsanimals.com

 

I am curious to know exactly what PETA did that caused you to go vegan? Was it that they made being vegan fun? How exactly is veganism fun for you thanks to PETA?

 

For one thing it was simply knowing the name PETA and then coming online to see what it was about. For another it was all the information they provided. And as a side the attitude portrayed from their websites made it easier and more enjoyable.

 

How is it fun? Stickers. Slogans. Leaflets. Rewards. Clothing. Recipes. Intelligence. Protests. Games. What isn't fun?

[bronco]

From Merriam Webster Online:

 

1 : to make productive use of : UTILIZE

 

Notice that the first example reflects upon using oneself.

However in this context I think the second definition is the one referred to:

 

2: to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage

 

What does using a naked body for veganism have to do with sexism? Please make a concise link between nakedness (for veganism) and sexism.

These links might give you a rough idea what we are talking about:

 

http://www.mediaandwomen.org/problem.html

http://www.medialit.org/reading_room/article40.html

http://www.csuohio.edu/clevelandstater/Archives/Vol%206/Issue%2010/news/news5.html

http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/issues/stereotyping/women_and_girls/women_sex.cfm

 

For one thing it was simply knowing the name PETA and then coming online to see what it was about. For another it was all the information they provided. And as a side the attitude portrayed from their websites made it easier and more enjoyable.

 

How is it fun? Stickers. Slogans. Leaflets. Rewards. Clothing. Recipes. Intelligence. Protests. Games. What isn't fun?

And you wouldnt have known the name and visited the website if they didnt have pictures of naked women?

[_raVen_]

Nice links, bronco!

 

*smooches* to Jay and bronco; thanks for standing up for women, Guys (and all other animals).

 

 

Check this out: This is an example of the hypocrisy of Peta. Emphasis on the bold...oh, the metal taste in my mouth....

 

http://supervegan.com/blog/images/Pam%20for%20PETA.jpg

 

"PETA's Dan Mathews, said:

 

SNARLS to Michelle Rodriguez. Who does she think she is taking Skanda, a nine-week-old tiger clubbing with her? The Lost star must have momentarily lost her mind. PETA's Dan Mathews, said:

 

"We know Michelle Rodriguez is an animal lover, but I think she is unaware how infant animals need to be around their mother and not a clanging party scene.

 

"They're not meant to be an ornament at a party, even one that is designed to raise money for animals. It kind of defeats the purpose."

 

You bet it does. "

-----

 

Nahhhh, PeTa is not sexist or hypocritical!! Jay and Bronco, you two are out of your minds! Let's not use animals, let's use women!

 

--

 

I've never read a testimony of anyone going vegan because of the exploitation by Peta, even if that was how they were introduced to Peta/animal rights ( which I doubt is a regular occurence). All testify it was a video, the literature, internet info, etc., which APPEALS TO THE INTELLECT or EMOTIONS.

 

To my suggestions, which were ignored, I will reiterate that Peta is not respected and will not -- if they don't change from a tabloid organization to a serious organization -- advance change on a large scale that they *can* at least begin with all the money they make.

While I wouldn't consider politicians "respectable," it is they with the power for change: none want to be associated with Peta, and neither will respected news organizations or other mediums without large-scale support.

[AllIveEverTouched]

Main Entry: sex·ism

Pronunciation: 'sek-"si-z&m

Function: noun

Etymology: 1sex + -ism (as in racism)

1 : prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially : discrimination against women

2 : behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex

 

http://www.m-w.com

 

 

I have still not received a concise link from a naked woman protesting for veganism to sexism.

 

 

 

A woman (OR A MAN) who is displaying their body for the point of comparison to an animals body, is naked for the sake of veganism. Nudity in and of itself is not a sexist state of being. Nudity for veganism is not sexist. If you can, please tell me WHY it is.

 

Also, exploitation of the naked body is also not inherently sexist ( prejudice or discrimination based on sex or behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex ). A person may be naked in the shower in a commercial for soap. A person may be naked to display a tanning product. The idea is not that they are sexual objects, but to promote a product. The focus is the product, not the nudity. They want you to buy the product. The product is the object.

 

It takes a true imbecile to believe that a naked person is an object. Chances are those people will believe this without needing persuasion from an outside source such as media to begin with.

 

 

 

And you wouldnt have known the name and visited the website if they didnt have pictures of naked women?

 

For my personal experience? No. But what does that have to do with anything? Nudity is taboo in America and it's a free ticket to raucous and exposure. I applaud them for using nudity. How come no one has mentioned the Running of the Nudes by the way?

 

 

 

 

Touting each other for standing up for noble causes and shunning me on a message board is immature, especially as I have never disagreed with the idea that sexism exists or that it is a problem in America and much moreso around the world. It's very easy to point fingers (at me, at PETA, at demonstrators) and cry out valiant reasons but it doesn't mean anything until you can prove yourselves, which to me you still haven't.

 

And hey, if that's not important to you, so what? I'm noone special...

[compassionategirl]

Good for you, ALLIEVERTOUCHED! You are not alone in many of your sentiments by the way!

[offense74]

"We need to raise the moral values so that we, as a society can reach higher levels of purity."

 

This phrase could have been said (and probably has) by many in history. It gets tiredsome.

Feel free to start your own animal activist group and then try to outnumber PETA. You could also use the same group to spread the word on how your moral purity will save mankind.

 

I doubt it will work very well. The animals are the losers.

[Guest]

I think its crazy that people are bothered by nudity at all. Unless people are having sex in public I don't see anything wrong with it. When society is at a more pure level they will be more accepting instead of closed minded. For the most part women are less covered in a volleyball match or triathlon. This is plain crazy talk.

[Kathryn]

I think its crazy that people are bothered by nudity at all. Unless people are having sex in public I don't see anything wrong with it. When society is at a more pure level they will be more accepting instead of closed minded.

 

It's not nudity per se that is troublesome. We're not talking nude beaches or a bunch of people playing volleyball or a sports event here (though one could argue that, yes, why are female beach volleyball players wearing skimpy bikinis while males wear long shorts? But that's another discussion) . We're talking about, once again, primarily women being seen as objects of another's gaze, objectified a 'something' to look at, and not in a participatory way (we're all at a bar, all dressed to impress and I want you to look) .

 

If women had never been objectified this way, this would be a moot point. Then, I'd say, let's all get naked for Peta!

 

And doing something 'for the sake of animals,' while laudible, does not make any means valid to reach this noble end. I'm sure that Kurt Russel who used to (maybe still does?) host canned hunts, with the money people paid to shoot tame animals up close being donated to benefit humans, thought that this means (the hunt) was justified by the end (help for humans).

[Guest]

The mindset can be reversed if its in your face enough. 100yrs ago Europe was a conservative christian continents and now most of Europe if extremely comfortable with nudity to the point that even on public tv you can see it and nobody gets overly excited. That won't happen if you just wait. As for clothes and sports the men care about how they look and think short, tight things don't look good on guys and for the most part women wear small clothes for the same reason men used too...you move much better in them. As for Kurt Russel thats crap...it would be OK for humans to hurt other humans to help humans so long as they were all volunteering to do so. If they were forced into it like canned hunting that would be a different story.

[_raVen_]

I didn't realize that thanking vegans for standing up for animals was "immature" on VBB; but thank you for the heads up. I'm sure the hundreds of posts here, of vegans touting each other will be removed shortly.

The point seems to have been lost on you: Vegans standing up for all animals, including human animals shows a consistency of ethics (thus, the thank you acknowledgement).

 

Then the very explicit example was given of the inconsistency and hypocrisy of using one for another. The irony

also seems to have been lost that it was out of the mouth of Peta itself.

 

You seem to not want to respond to so many points put forth and insist on things no one has even mentioned, such as nudity=sexism. No one here has referred to that, yet you keep on insisting on it. No one said nudity is bad or a "sexist state" or evil. (Jay is a nudist)

One has to take context into consideration. Nudity can be part of an instance of sexism in context, don't you see that? Just like "ownership" of an animal can be an act of cruelty in one context and not another.

It's the sum of all the parts; not cherry picking out of context.

 

 

You're all over the place here...what does America have to do with this discussion? I know America bashing is the fashionable thing to do, but, really.

 

And by your source definition -- number 2 -- you've made the point:

 

"behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex"

 

Peta engages in behaviors, creates conditions, and fosters attitudes which perpetuate stereotypes and bias based on roles forced upon women. It is very simple.

 

 

shun: to avoid deliberately and especially habitually

 

Really? Who has shunned you AIET?

 

"Nudity is taboo in America and it's a free ticket to raucous and exposure. I applaud them for using nudity."

 

Since quoting the dictionary seems to be so important here: "Raucous" is an adjective so I'm not sure if you meant "raucous exposure"? If so, that also makes my point:

 

"raucous:

1 : disagreeably harsh or strident

2 : boisterously disorderly"

 

As long as Peta is viewed as raucous they will never be respected on a scale to make changes tangible for animals.

I don't want to be associated with "raucous" behavior nor have "raucous" and "veganism" be synonymous or be words the public associate with eachother. Is that best serving the animals?

It's interesting that you state nudity leads to raucous behavior while arguing it is harmless?? And then applaud its usage for exactly this end.

 

Chances are those people will believe this without needing persuasion from an outside source such as media to begin with.

 

Lol. Yes, that is why what Peta is doing is exploitation. Appealing to sexist ideals, thereby perpetuating them -- upholding them -- instead of smashing them or just avoiding using them. Per your source defintion, they are creating the conditions to foster the stereotypes.

 

These are more good examples of Peta's tactics being sexist. Do you see now? Perhaps you believe using sexism is okay for the sake of veganism? At this point, that is what I am inferring -- correct me if I'm off base. And, of course that's your prerogative. It would just be a more productive conversation if you stated so. I have had discussions with people who believe "by any means necessary." It's not a new position And there is good (mostly) intention behind it, which I would certainly attribute to you.

 

And, of course, I'm sure you didn't mean to call anyone here an "imbecile" did you?

 

I hope you don't feel ganged up on -- you seem to be a bit emotional; let us know if you do. That's certainly not my intention But if you really do not respond to the points made and keep insisting on examples when there have been some put forth, then there is no purpose to continue.

[AllIveEverTouched]

Then the very explicit example was given of the inconsistency and hypocrisy of using one for another.

 

Yes this point is still "lost on me" as I don't see why the "using" is harmful.

 

 

You seem to not want to respond to so many points put forth and insist on things no one has even mentioned, such as nudity=sexism. No one here has referred to that, yet you keep on insisting on it. No one said nudity is bad or a "sexist state" or evil.

 

Some points I simply felt were not worth responding towards, especially since many didn't relate to my question, which was, "How is a naked woman protesting for veganism sexist?"

 

One has to take context into consideration. Nudity can be part of an instance of sexism in context, don't you see that?

 

Poppycock!

 

You're all over the place here...what does America have to do with this discussion? I know America bashing is the fashionable thing to do, but, really.

 

PETA is based in America. I bash everybody not just Americans trust me

 

 

Peta engages in behaviors, creates conditions, and fosters attitudes which perpetuate stereotypes and bias based on roles forced upon women. It is very simple.

 

How?

 

As long as Peta is viewed as raucous they will never be respected on a scale to make changes tangible for animals.

 

I disagree.

 

It's interesting that you state nudity leads to raucous behavior while arguing it is harmless?? And then applaud its usage for exactly this end.

 

Well yes. It leads to exposure and then after the hootenanny is over the people who stick around become educated about the matter at hand. I don't believe that the people who are turned away by demonstrations would have listened to a calmer setting anyway. Closedmindedeness is closedmindedness.

 

 

Lol. Yes, that is why what Peta is doing is exploitation. Appealing to sexist ideals, thereby perpetuating them -- upholding them -- instead of smashing them or just avoiding using them. Per your source defintion, they are creating the conditions to foster the stereotypes.

 

But that is incidental. If they were sexist they would be promoting that veganism grows larger boobs and bigger penises. However the nudity is used as an attention grabber, and not the focus of the demonstrations.

 

These are more good examples of Peta's tactics being sexist. Do you see now?

 

I see where you are coming from but I still don't see the where our paths cross.

 

Perhaps you believe using sexism is okay for the sake of veganism?

 

Not unless I am unaware of this belief in myself.

 

And, of course, I'm sure you didn't mean to call anyone here an "imbecile" did you?

 

Actually, no I didn't as I don't believe (perhaps naively) anyone here sexually objectifies people.

 

I hope you don't feel ganged up on -- you seem to be a bit emotional; let us know if you do.

 

No need to feel it - it's just there. A few people are responding to me. I wouldn't say emotional, however. I'm just a boisterous person, maybe that's emotional to others just normal for me.

 

But if you really do not respond to the points made and keep insisting on examples when there have been some put forth, then there is no purpose to continue.

 

These examples don't answer my question. I am responding to points being made, what else is there to respond to?

 

 

 

I like discussions like this... I'm an abrasive person and while that may turn people off it suits me fine. Hope all is well.

[offense74]

I never seem to get what the solution is to this (if there is any).

Heterosexual men likes to look at women. If someone told you otherwise, they lied. You are on this planet thanks to the fact that you're parents once (at least) felt sexual attraction for each other, as is every human being and most other mammals too. Before your parent knew each other they checked each other out.

Men have been checking out women and objectified them since we were lizards. Nothing new here.

If you're protesting this, you're protesting how nature works, which seems pointless to me.

 

This fact has of course alot of implications (conscious or not) on human behaviour and it can be used for all sorts of things, both negative and positive.

Business uses it to sell products, Peta uses it to get awareness for animal rights, the porn industry uses it to excite people sexually and alot of women uses it to gain advantages over men.

 

This is not only from the womens perspective. Women check me out all of the time whether I like it or not. There's nowhere or noone I can run to to make it stop. It's nature and nature always rocks!

 

Every human beings right to their own life and choices is another story, this you can protest (ie women not being able to take certain jobs because of men feeling threatened or whatever) and I will gladly help you in this cause.

[_raVen_]

Okay, you've made it pretty clear you're not taking this seriously, are not addressing any points; are being dismissive, and to say your questions have not been answered makes this very clear. So I won't put (too much) more energy into this.

"I disagree" is reeeeally not a cogent response. And ignoring parts you cannot answer isn't very helpful either. And just for your edification, just saying "poppycock" doesn't in any way counter what was stated; makes you appear very inexperienced and uninformed of the issues.

 

Asking, "How" when I gave you an example already is now seeming like you are just playing here.

It seems you are not reading the posts or considering the points made: you have been given example after example and refuse to respond to them, insisting there are none. Insisting on something doesn't make it so. Until you counter the proposed positions with a response, then you cannot expect more or for the conversation to be advanced in any intelligible manner.

 

 

 

 

But I will address this one .

 

Yes this point is still "lost on me" as I don't see why the "using" is harmful.

 

"Using" is part of the essence of veganism and you don't get it?

 

Actually Peta answers it nicely for you in my previous post in which I even bolded the print for easy reading:

"They're not meant to be an ornament at a party, even one that is designed to raise money for animals. It kind of defeats the purpose."

Animals are not meant to be used "even one that is designed to raise money for animals."

 

I agree with Peta on that -- that's the point; however juxtaposed with the photograph of their tactics is where the irony lies (and incredibility). I can't make it -- or rather, Peta itself -- cannot make it any clearer. Using animals to promote veganism "defeats the purpose." Very simple.

You may be an "by any means necessary person"; interesting that you don't even know if you are or not. Perhaps you should get to know yourself a little better

 

Hope you're well too.

[AllIveEverTouched]

The "poppycock" was sarcastic.

 

 

I don't think much else can come about from the two of us talking so I'll leave it to others if they have anything to say, unless you have more by all means...

 

 

 

Most is well, but a great paying full-time first shift job would be just wonderful! Yourself?

[_raVen_]

Gotcha

 

Hmmm... a job? Have you tried Peta?

[AllIveEverTouched]

Gosh I've considered it but I want to conquer the challenge of living here. Sometimes I wonder if I ever will lol

[Guest]

I don't see the point in standing up for animals(aka PETA nudies) volunteering to do something. If a cow could talk and asked someone to slaughter it I don't think you'd need to stand up for that cow. Surely behavior fosters stereotypes but stereotypes change when people are exposed to reality more often. Lets take homosexuality as an example. If it weren't for the openess of the gay community of the late 60s and early 70s

the world would be a more darker place...temporarily they even made gay stereotypes even worse until people realized that they weren't harming anyone(well alot more people realized it)...or if it was your way Raven...gay people would be seen just fine so long as they didn't show there faces amongst non-gays...this is just crazy. Nothings works better than exposure...even if it causes some temporary damage...otherwise women would have to wear dresses down to their ankles and wouldn't be allowed to wear tank tops(the opposite were seen as degrading to women when they started wearing them)...obviously your the one feeling a little ganged up on Raven since your rants seem to be quite a bit all over the place since your the one answering to the most people...sorry if I had to inform you of that

[Tarz]

And you wouldnt have known the name and visited the website if they didnt have pictures of naked women?

 

I was aware of PETA for their animal welfare activities and not because of their use of obliging models.

[Tarz]

Good for you, ALLIEVERTOUCHED! You are not alone in many of your sentiments by the way!

 

I'll second that - stick to your guns AIET.

[Tarz]

I've never read a testimony of anyone going vegan because of the exploitation by Peta, even if that was how they were introduced to Peta/animal rights ( which I doubt is a regular occurence). All testify it was a video, the literature, internet info, etc., which APPEALS TO THE INTELLECT or EMOTIONS.

 

Have you read a testimony of any potential vegan who decided not to become vegan because of this so-called 'exploitation' by PETA?

[Tarz]

While I wouldn't consider politicians "respectable," it is they with the power for change: none want to be associated with Peta, and neither will respected news organizations or other mediums without large-scale support.

 

Most politicians do not and will not associate themselves with animal rights groups period, whatever tactics they do or don't use.

[Tarz]

Interesting that all those moaning about PETA's use of nudes are only complaining about the use of female nudes. As usual sexism seems to be a one way concept - i.e it only applies to women. It's no secret that this method of campaiging doesn't bother me, but for those it does you would be more credible if you were equally opposed to PETA using male nudes.

[Tarz]

I hope you don't feel ganged up on -- you seem to be a bit emotional; let us know if you do. That's certainly not my intention

 

AIET has plenty in his own gang. Accusing someone of being emotional because they hold a different opinion to you and they continue to debate with you is unneccessary.

[Tarz]

I dont see pissing of conservatives as a problem, being pissed off by any progressive ideas is what makes them conservatives . I think it is far worse that they piss off radical, antisexist people.

 

You are implying that conservatives are inherently sexist, which is blatantly not true.

 

PETA can piss off conservatives with impunity. Oh. OK then. That's all right. Why shouldn't PETA also piss off radicals, intentionally or not? How is it far worse?? What makes radicals so special? I am quite sure though that PETA doesn't seek to piss off either conservatives or radicals.

 

Personally I don't think PETA really gives a shit about either group and rightly so.

[loveliberate]

I have not jumped into this conversation primarily due to lack of time for doing a detailed post. For now, let me just say that I generally agree with what has been said by Raven, Jay & Bronco.